Skip to main content
Glama
devops-gm88

mcp-validation-server

by devops-gm88

Related Servers

Alternatives to mcp-validation-server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Deterministic verification for AI-generated analysis. Reconciliation, consistency and Excel-integrity checks that stop the line when the numbers don't add up.
      45 PyPI
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables language models to run data-quality checks and profiling on local files, using dbt-style assertions like not_null, unique, relationships, and accepted_values.
      MIT
    • F
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to perform financial reconciliation with a deterministic proof engine: intake files, match transactions, verify proofs, resolve exceptions, and sign off on balanced journals under the user's authority.
      21
      -
    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables auditing of extracted balance sheets, income statements, and cash flow reports by reconstructing complex document tables and verifying mathematical consistency and formula balancing. It also performs cross-reference resolution and sensitive PII redaction, returning structured matrices and validation telemetry over MCP to clients like Claude Desktop, Cursor, and Windsurf.
      4
      7
      MIT
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables LLMs to audit data drift and model degradation in tabular ML pipelines through deterministic statistical tests such as Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Population Stability Index, plus reusable prompts and standards resources.
      4
      -

    TDQS

    A4.4/5.0

    Scored across 4 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Each tool targets a distinct data-quality operation: contract-based row validation, arithmetic reconciliation, entity counting, and duplicate detection. The only overlap is that count_distinct and duplicate_report both consume rows+key, but their stated purposes (counting vs. reviewing suspects) are clearly separated by the descriptions.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    The set mixes conventions: validate_rows and count_distinct follow a verb_noun pattern, while reconcile is a bare verb and duplicate_report is noun_noun. All are readable and snake_case, but there is no single predictable rule.

    Tool Count5/5

    Four tools is well-scoped for a tabular data-validation server; each covers a distinct, classic quality check (row validity, closure, distinctness, duplication) and none feels redundant or padded.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the core data-quality checks and is deliberately read-only, with clear reporting rather than repair. A gap remains for cross-column/cross-table consistency (e.g. referential integrity between datasets) and schema inference, but core workflows are fully addressed.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues